StringSpec
REMOTE · STRINGSPEC.COM
Lab measurements of nearly 800 tennis strings: search, compare and get recommendations.
Available components
Last scanned (16 hours ago)
Scores higher than 94% of remote servers
Reachable. Last reached 5 Nov 2026.
Category Entertainment and Games
How this component scores in each security and reliability category. Every signal is checked automatically against the live server, and we only credit what we can confirm. How we score → Why this is hard to score →
Endpoint Security80
- The endpoint's TLS certificate is valid, in date, and uses a strong key. View diagnostics → Pass
- No authorisation is required to call this server. Nothing on it is marked destructive, but we can't show that an anonymous caller can only read: full credit needs the server to list at least one tool and every tool to be verifiably read-only. We use a best-effort check of tool names and descriptions to tell read-only tools from tools that change things, so some genuinely read-only tools may not get full credit. Names that start with a read verb (get, list, read, search and similar) and accurate readOnlyHint annotations help. Meet that to earn full credit, or require authorisation. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Partial
- HTTPS is enforced; there's no plaintext access path. View diagnostics → Pass
- The HSTS (Strict-Transport-Security) header is present. View diagnostics → Pass
- DNSSEC check failed: this domain isn't protected by DNSSEC. See how to fix → View diagnostics → Fail
Transport & Reachability100
- Verified streamable-http transport via a live MCP handshake. View diagnostics → Pass
Schema Quality & AI Usability79
- 100% of prompts and resources have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the item's name).Pass
- AI-judged instruction clarity (excellent).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 1021 tokens (~204/item across 5 items; 4 tools + 1 resources), over budget; trim descriptions and params. See how to fix → Fail
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management93
- Stability observed for 28 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage100
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 100% of tool parameters carry a description.Pass
Tool Safety100
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- We read all 4 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 6 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities100
- Implements a current MCP spec version (2026-07-28).Pass
- Supports UI / widget rendering.Pass
Checks we ran (14)
- TLS certificate
- Authorization
- HTTPS
- HSTS header
- DNSSEC
- Transport
- Schema quality
- Stability
- Tool coverage
- Injection markers
- Destructive annotations
- Judged manipulation
- MCP protocol
- Capabilities
Does not apply to this hosted endpoint (2)
- Supply Chain SecurityScored on package channels only. This is a hosted endpoint, so there is nothing to install or inspect.
- Provenance & TransparencyScored on package channels only. This is a hosted endpoint, so there is nothing to install or inspect.
The score does not measure everything. What the score does not measure →
Every change we have recorded for this component, newest first. Security-relevant changes are always shown. ▲ marks a change for the better, ▼ a change for the worse; unmarked changes are neutral.
- 4 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 87 to 90. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 26 days of observed history at the previous scan, 27 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 2 Nov 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 80 to 83. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 24 days of observed history at the previous scan, 25 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 31 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 73 to 77. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 22 days of observed history at the previous scan, 23 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 28 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 63 to 67. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 19 days of observed history at the previous scan, 20 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 26 Oct 26 +3
- Schema quality: 245 → 204 ▲ functional
- The server now declares the “resources” capability functional
- First check of Capabilities: pass functional
- First check of Schema quality: 100 functional
- New resource “compare-v1” functional
- 24 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 50 to 53. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 15 days of observed history at the previous scan, 16 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 22 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 43 to 47. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 13 days of observed history at the previous scan, 14 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 20 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 37 to 40. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 11 days of observed history at the previous scan, 12 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
Diagnostic detail from the automated scan of this channel: what the scanner observed at each step, so you can see exactly where a check passed or failed. It is informational only and never changes the trust score.
Captured 5 Nov 2026 · Probed https://stringspec.com/mcp
TLS valid
Negotiated TLS 1.3 with TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 .
| Subject | Issuer | Valid from | Valid until | Key | Signature | Serial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN=stringspec.com | CN=WE1,O=Google Trust Services,C=US | 28 Sept 2026 | 27 Dec 2026 | ECDSA 256 | ECDSA-SHA256 | 79d7a22f7c7d2d2213b7a043f1fbde92 |
| SANs: stringspec.com, *.stringspec.com | ||||||
| CN=WE1,O=Google Trust Services,C=US (CA) | CN=GTS Root R4,O=Google Trust Services LLC,C=US | 13 Dec 2023 | 20 Feb 2029 | ECDSA 256 | ECDSA-SHA384 | 7ff31977972c224a76155d13b6d685e3 |
| CN=GTS Root R4,O=Google Trust Services LLC,C=US (CA) | CN=GlobalSign Root CA,OU=Root CA,O=GlobalSign nv-sa,C=BE | 15 Nov 2023 | 28 Jan 2028 | ECDSA 384 | SHA256-RSA | 7fe530bf331343bedd821610493d8a1b |
Background: What to check on a remote MCP endpoint →
DNSSEC insecure
Validation of stringspec.com. — Not signed
| Zone | DS | Keys | Algorithms | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| . | Trust anchor | 20326, 38696 | 8, 8 | Verified |
| com. | DS published | 19718 | 13 | Verified |
| stringspec.com. | No DS | Unsigned (proven) parent-signed NSEC/NSEC3 proves an unsigned delegation |
Authentication No authorisation required
The endpoint answered without asking for a token. Anyone who knows the URL can reach it.
| Result | No authorisation required |
|---|---|
| HTTP status | 200 |
| Header | Value |
|---|---|
| strict-transport-security | max-age=63072000; includeSubdomains; preload |
| x-content-type-options | nosniff |
| x-frame-options | SAMEORIGIN |
| referrer-policy | strict-origin-when-cross-origin |
| permissions-policy | geolocation=(), microphone=(), camera=() |
Background: How OAuth 2.1 works in the 2026 MCP spec →
Transports 2 probes
| Transport | URL | Outcome | Status | Location |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| streamable-http | https://stringspec.com/mcp | Verified | 200 | |
| http (plaintext) | http://stringspec.com/mcp | HTTPS enforced | 301 | https://stringspec.com/mcp |
The tools this component advertises to a client, with an estimated token cost for each. Expand a tool to see its parameters and schema. The per-tool counts are indicative and are not scored directly; the schema's total context footprint is one signal in Schema Quality & AI Usability. A tool's description is untrusted text the model reads on every call, which is what makes this list a security surface and not just an inventory: how tool poisoning works →
compare_strings Compare tennis strings ~53
Side-by-side measurements, percentiles, prices and buy links for 2 or 3 strings by name, with the StringSpec comparison page when there are two.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| names | array | yes | Two or three string names. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
get_string Get one tennis string ~142
Everything StringSpec has on one string, found by name (misspellings and missing gauges are fine): every measurement with its database percentile, elongation at 40, 51 and 62 lb, an estimated playable life, a tension adjustment versus the player's usual, how it ranks for each playing need (spin, comfort, control, power, tension hold, durability, feel), the closest alternatives, the retail price and a buy link. When the name matches several strings it returns the best match and lists the others.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | string | yes | The string's name, e.g. "Luxilon ALU Power 16L" or "RPM Blast". |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
recommend_strings Recommend tennis strings for a player ~317
Rank the database for what a player wants, with StringSpec's string finder: one main need and an optional second one (spin (More spin and shape), comfort (Easier on my arm), control (More control, less launch), power (More power and depth), hold (Plays the same for longer), durable (Lasts longer before it breaks), feel (Best feel and touch)), adjusted for the racquet (string pattern, head size, frame stiffness) and with a material ruled out if asked. Returns a shortlist with a 0-100 fit, why each string fits, its price and buy link, and the finder link with the same answers filled in. For arm or elbow pain use need "comfort", and avoid "poly" when the player wants no polyester.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| also | string | – | An optional second need, weighted lower than the first. |
| avoid | string | – | gut (no natural gut), poly (no polyester), polyonly (polyester only). |
| frame | string | – | Frame feel: flex (flexible, arm-friendly), avg, stiff (stiff and powerful). |
| head | string | – | Head size: small (under 98 sq in), mid (98-100), large (100 and up). |
| limit | integer | – | Shortlist length (default 8). |
| need | string | yes | The main thing the player wants. |
| pattern | string | – | String pattern: open (16x19 or more open) or dense (18x20 or tighter). |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
search_strings Search tennis strings ~326
Search 791 lab-measured tennis strings by name, brand, material and gauge, sorted by a measurement or by price. Each result carries stiffness (lb/in), tension loss (%), energy return (%), spin potential, ball bite and string friction, each with its percentile in the database, plus the current retail price, a buy link and the StringSpec page. Returns at most 10 strings; narrow the filters rather than asking for more.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| brand | string | – | Brand name, e.g. "Babolat", "Luxilon", "Solinco". |
| gauge | string | – | Gauge label. A higher number is thinner, and an "L" gauge is thinner than its base (17L is thinner than 17). |
| include_discontinued | boolean | – | Include strings no longer sold (default false). |
| limit | integer | – | How many to return (default 10). |
| material | string | – | Construction family. Polyester is the stiff spin-friendly monofilament; Nylon covers synthetic gut and multifilaments; Gut is natural gut. |
| max_price_usd | number | – | Only strings with a retail set price at or under this, in USD. Strings without a price are excluded when this is set. |
| query | string | – | Words from the string's name, e.g. "alu power", "hyper-g", "rpm blast". |
| sort | string | – | popular (a retailer's units-sold order, default), softest, stiffest, most_spin, best_tension_hold, most_power (energy return), cheapest. |
No output schema declared.
No examples provided.
How do I install the StringSpec MCP server?
StringSpec is a hosted endpoint at https://stringspec.com/mcp, so there is nothing to install locally. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
remote · stringspec.com
claude mcp add --transport http com-stringspec-mcp 'https://stringspec.com/mcp'
What is the StringSpec MCP server?
StringSpec is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as com.stringspec/mcp. Lab measurements of nearly 800 tennis strings: search, compare and get recommendations. This page covers its hosted endpoint (https://stringspec.com/mcp).
Is the StringSpec MCP server safe to use?
StringSpec scores 87 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. That is a record of what we were able to check automatically, not an endorsement. The category breakdown on this page shows every signal behind the number, including the ones we could not confirm.
What tools does the StringSpec MCP server expose?
StringSpec exposes 4 tools: search_strings, get_string, compare_strings, recommend_strings. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 838 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Does the StringSpec MCP server require authentication?
No. We connected to StringSpec without credentials and it answered, so anything it exposes is reachable by anyone who knows the address.
Is the StringSpec MCP server still maintained?
StringSpec is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 5 November 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.
What did VerifyMCP test on the StringSpec MCP server?
VerifyMCP ran 14 checks on StringSpec, covering TLS certificate, Authorization, HTTPS, HSTS header and 10 more. Supply Chain Security and Provenance & Transparency do not apply to a hosted endpoint, so they were not tested. The score does not measure everything, and the scoring documentation lists what it leaves out.